DOCSLIB.ORG

Open Access Potential and Uptake in the Context of Plan S - a Partial Gap Analysis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

Open access potential and uptake in the context of Plan S - a partial gap analysis - ■ November 2019 Prepared by Bianca Kramer & Jeroen Bosman Utrecht University Library This work was commissioned on behalf of cOAlition S by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), a member of cOAlition S. Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman of Utrecht University Library were appointed to lead the project. 1 Open access potential and uptake in the context of Plan S - a partial gap analysis Utrecht, November 2019 Bianca Kramer 0000-0002-5965-6560 ​ Jeroen Bosman 0000-0001-5796-2727 ​ This work was commissioned on behalf of cOAlition S by the Dutch Research Council (NWO), a member of cOAlition S. Bianca Kramer and Jeroen Bosman of Utrecht University Library were appointed to lead the project. A number of colleagues at Utrecht University Library contributed data and insights to the 30 narratives for subdisciplines in this report, among which: Jan de Boer Arja Firet 0000-0002-2271-6996 ​ Margriet Fokken 0000-0003-1728-1972 ​ Joost van Gemert 0000-0002-0121-2473 ​ Marjan Groenouwe 0000-0003-1696-0519 ​ Erika Manten Barbara Vreede 0000-0002-5023-4601 ​ Felix Weijdema 0000-0001-5150-1102 ​ Paulien Wiersma 0000-0003-0597-4800 ​ report available at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3543000 ​ data available at: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3549020 ​ 2 Table of contents Executive summary 5 1. Introduction 8 2. Methodology 10 3. Main results 15 3.1 Open access options and usage 15 3.2 Full gold OA - CC licenses and copyright retention 17 3.3 Hybrid journals - licenses 19 3.4 Green OA - embargoes, licenses and copyright retention 21 3.5 Database options and recommendations 24 4. Main disciplines - results and publication culture 26 4.1 Physical sciences & technology 26 4.2 Life sciences & medicine 28 4.3 Social sciences 30 4.4 Arts & humanities 31 5. Subdisciplines - results visualization 34 A. Open access options and usage 35 B. Full gold OA journals - CC licenses & copyright retention 36 C. Hybrid journals - licenses 37 D. Green OA - embargoes 38 E. Green OA - licenses 39 F. Green OA - copyright retention 40 6. Subdisciplines - results and publication culture 41 PHYSICS 41 CHEMISTRY 44 ENGINEERING 46 MATERIALS SCIENCE 48 MATHEMATICS 50 ASTRONOMY & ASTROPHYSICS 52 COMPUTER SCIENCE 54 OPTICS 56 GEOLOGY 58 ENERGY & FUELS 60 3 BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY 62 NEUROSCIENCES & NEUROLOGY 66 CELL BIOLOGY 68 PHARMACOLOGY & PHARMACY 70 IMMUNOLOGY 72 PUBLIC ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH 74 MICROBIOLOGY 76 GENETICS & HEREDITY 78 ONCOLOGY 80 BUSINESS & ECONOMICS 84 GOVERNMENT & LAW 86 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH 88 GEOGRAPHY 90 LINGUISTICS 92 PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION 94 SOCIOLOGY 96 PHILOSOPHY 98 HISTORY 100 References 103 Appendix 104 A1. Journal size 104 A2. Full gold OA journals - Publisher types and fee/no-fee journals 105 A3. Coverage of social sciences and arts & humanities 111 A4. Database characteristics 114 A5. Coverage of newer full OA publishing venues 115 4 Executive summary Context Plan S, launched in September 2018, aims to accelerate a transition to full and immediate Open Access. In the guidance to implementation, released in November 2018 and updated in May 2019, a gap analysis of Open Access journals/platforms was announced. Its goal was to inform Coalition S funders on the Open Access options per field and identify fields where there is a need to increase the share of Open Access journals/platforms. The analysis presented in this report, carried out by Utrecht University Library, aims to provide cOAlition S with initial quantitative and descriptive data on the availability and usage of various open access options in different fields and subdisciplines, and, as far as possible, their compliance with Plan S requirements. As such, it should be seen as a first step: an exploration in methodology as much as in results. Subsequent interpretation (e.g. on fields where funder investment/action is needed) and decisions on next steps (e.g. on more complete and longitudinal monitoring of Plan S-compliant venues) is intentionally left to cOAlition S and its members. Approach For this analysis, we looked at the journals in Web of Science in which cOAlition S-funded research was published in 2017. We included all members of cOAlition S at the time of sampling (November 2018) as well as EC and ERC. Combining information from various sources (notably Unpaywall, Directory of Open Access Journals, Crossref and SHERPA/RoMEO), we analyzed the proportion and characteristics of full OA journals, hybrid journals and journals allowing green OA (self-archiving) in four main fields and 30 subdisciplines, as well as the proportion of articles with cOAlition S funding that made use of these options for OA publishing. We also looked, as far as possible, at the proportion of journals meeting plan S requirements regarding copyright retention, compliant CC-licenses and absence of embargoes. The analysis did not include the technical requirements for journals and repositories mandated or recommended in Plan S, transparency of costs and prices, or the extent to which hybrid journals are currently part of transformative arrangements for cOAlition S funded researchers, as this could not be determined using our methods. Also, it should be stressed that any gaps and compliance levels revealed in this study can not and do not take into account the effects of planned or expected policy changes, or changes that have been implemented since 2017. The study also briefly reports on distribution of journal size and, for full gold OA journals, publisher types and publication fee levying. Finally, in addition to information about open access options, the reports also covers some aspects of publication cultures in the respective fields and subdisciplines: the role of societies, the importance of languages other than English, typical numbers of co-authors and CC-licenses used. This provides contextual information to enhance the interpretation of the analyses and identify potential for policy changes. 5 Limitations As this analysis is only based on journals included in Web of Science, it should be seen as a first attempt or proof of concept. We identify and address a number of methodological limitations and inherent biases in our data, and give recommendations for a more complete analysis using additional (and ideally fully open) data sources. Methodological and data limitations in this study lead to lack of coverage (esp. in social sciences and arts & humanities) and some underestimation (a.o. of hybrid and green OA). Regarding coverage, Web of Science has a known bias towards the sciences, a time lag in including new journals and geographical biases in coverage. In particular, the low numbers of journals and articles in certain fields in social sciences and almost all fields in the arts & humanities limits the usefulness of the approach taken in this gap analysis for these fields. Main results - potential and uptake of open access types The report shows the number and proportion of gold OA DOAJ journals, hybrid journals and closed journals per main field and for 30 subdisciplines, as well as the number and proportion of hybrid and subscription journals allowing green archiving. Similarly, the number and proportion of articles of each OA type in these journals per main field are reported. The results show that in all main fields, including arts & humanities, over 75% of journals in our analysis do allow gold open access publishing. This currently consists predominantly of hybrid journals, which authors can only use in a Plan S compliant publishing route when the journal is part of a transformative arrangement or when authors also immediately share their article as green OA. Almost all hybrid journals included in this analysis (irrespective of discipline) do allow for green OA archiving, but green OA options could only be detected for about 50% of closed journals. The largest shares of full OA journals are found in life sciences & medicine and physical sciences & technology, which is also reflected in their uptake. The most striking though not surprising result is the very large number of closed publications in hybrid journals, also given the fact that most of these journals do allow green open access. The share of open access publications in hybrid journals is, again, the highest in life sciences & medicine but surprisingly the lowest in physical sciences & technology, with intermediary levels in social sciences and in arts & humanities. Main results - licenses allowed by full gold and hybrid journals Using information from DOAJ directly as well as license information from Crossref and Unpaywall, the number of full gold journals allowing CC-BY/SA/ND or public domain licensing, ​ ​ as well as author copyright retention, was retrieved. The results show that a sizeable proportion (52%) of full gold OA journals already allow Plan S compliant licenses as well as copyright retention and importantly, that these journals are responsible for a large majority (78%) of ​ ​ articles published in full OA journals by cOAlition S fundees. The biggest opportunity (in a quantitative sense) for physical sciences & technology and life sciences & medicine is increased offering of copyright retention, while in arts & humanities it is increased offering of compliant licenses. Using information at journal level from Crossref, SHERPA/RoMEO and Unpaywall, an estimation can be made of the number and proportion of hybrid journals in a field currently ​ ​ 6 allowing a CC-BY/SA/ND license for OA articles. The results show that, depending on the main field, between 30-50% of hybrid journals currently allow the use of Plan S compliant licenses. Main results - green open access embargoes Almost all hybrid journals and about half of the closed journals in our analysis do allow green OA archiving. The results show that in physical sciences & technology and life sciences & medicine, a 12 month embargo is most prevalent, with longer embargoes more common in social sciences and especially arts & humanities.
Recommended publications
  • Peter Baldwin UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES

    Peter Baldwin UNIVERSITY of CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES

    Features Forum Conference Reports GHI News WHY ARE UNIVERSITIES OPEN ACCESS LAGGARDS? Peter Baldwin UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES Copyright was invented in the eighteenth century to give cultural producers property rights in their works, allowing them to live from their eff orts.1 It was specifi cally intended to benefi t those who worked independently, not for wages or salary. Work-for-hire was the only element of copyright dealing with salaried employees. That evolved only later in any detail, and then not equally in all nations. Work-for-hire gives employers — not the creators — most rights in works produced by their employees. It was introduced in the nine- teenth century to deal with commissioned art works. Who owned a portrait, the painter or the commissioner? But it was elaborated in law mainly in the twentieth century, especially in the U.S., and largely at the behest of the fi lm industry. It is not hard to see why. Film is an inherently collaborative art form, demanding cooperation among scores of diff erent creators, all with reasonable claims to be important participants. Copyright stakes two primary claims: the artistic or moral rights, like those of attribution and integrity, and the economic or monopoly rights. The fi rst give authors the right to be identifi ed as such and to prevent their works from being changed without approval. They are largely uncontroversial and need no further comment here. The property right grants a temporary monopoly over dissemination, thus stimulating creators to further eff orts by rewarding them. Equally important, copyright’s monopoly made dissemination possible in the fi rst place.
  • Open Publications

    Open Publications

    Open publications Research Services Essential Series Open Research Team 10th Feb 2021 1 Open Research team Caroline Huxtable (Open Access Repository Officer) Imogen Ward-Smith (Open Access Publications Officer) Chris Tibbs (Research Data Officer) Sofia Fernandes (Open Research Manager) www.exeter.ac.uk/research/openresearch/support/contact 2 http://www.exeter.ac.uk/research/researchdatamanagement/support/contact/ 2 Agenda • What is open research? • Why publish open access? • Open access, Symplectic and ORE • Open access policies • Publishing open access on the publisher website [email protected] 3 3 Open research Open research involves openness throughout the research lifecycle: • Openness as part of project planning / concept • Open notebook science • Making research methodology, software, code freely available • Open peer review • Open access to publications • Open data doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.49960 4 Open research lifecycle: Grigorov, Ivo. et al. (2016) ‘Research Lifecycle enhanced by an "Open Science by Default" Workflow’, Zenodo. DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.49960 Wikipedia: Open-notebook science is the practice of making the entire primary record of a research project publicly available online as it is recorded. This involves placing the personal, or laboratory, notebook of the researcher online along with all raw and processed data, and any associated material, as this material is generated. Open peer review includes e.g. the author and reviewer identities are disclosed to each other during the peer review process, unlike the traditional peer review process where reviewers are anonymous except to the editors; making reviewers' reports public, rather than disclosing to the authors only, (this may include publishing authors' replies and editors' recommendations); allowing self-selected reviewers to comment on an article, rather than (or in addition to) having reviewers selected by the editors.
  • Programme Organised in Collaboration with EUA and LIBER

    Programme Organised in Collaboration with EUA and LIBER

    Science Europe is a non-profit organisation based in Brussels representing major Research Funding and Research Performing Organisations across Europe. For more information on its mission and activities, see www.scienceeurope.org. To contact Science Europe, e-mail [email protected]. Challenging the Current Business Models Workshop in Academic Publishing Accelerators and Obstacles to the Open Access Transition Programme organised in collaboration with EUA and LIBER When Background 26–27 April 2017 “Ensure that […] transparency is improved, in particular by informing the public about agreements Wednesday 12.00–17.45 between public institutions or groups of public institutions and publishers for the supply of scientific Thursday 09.00–13.10 information. This should include agreements covering the so-called ‘big deals’, i.e. bundles of print and electronic journal subscriptions offered at discounted price…” —European Commission, 17 July 2012 Where Bundles of journals offered by publishers and acquired by libraries, the so-called ‘Big Deals’, are the Radisson Blu Astrid dominating business model in academic publishing. They were introduced to answer the so-called Koningin Astridplein 7 serials crisis which occurred in the subscription model about two decades ago. Nowadays, the logic 2018 Antwerp, Belgium and also the business structures behind ‘Big Deals’ are increasingly considered and employed to shape the transition from the subscription world into an open access publishing paradigm based on article processing charges (APCs). Dinner ‘Big Deals’ have advantages, yet also severe disadvantages, and thus are a highly disputed business Grand Café De Rooden Hoed model. This leads to the question if and what disadvantages of the ‘Big Deals’ need to be taken into Oude Koornmarkt 25 account when using them as a transition instrument to implement and increase open access and how 2000 Antwerp, Belgium such disadvantages could be avoided or mitigated.
  • Scholarly Research and Information

    Scholarly Research and Information

    ISSN 2658-3143 (Online) ТОМ 1, № 1, 2018 WWW.NEICONJOURNAL.COM НАУКА И НАУЧНАЯ ИНФОРМАЦИЯ SCHOLARLY RESEARCH AND INFORMATION В НОМЕРЕ: Отношение российского научного сообщества к открытому доступу: 2018 г. Анализ результа- тов опроса Разумова И.К., Литвинова Н.Н., Шварцман М.Е., Кузнецов А.Ю. Сетевые сервисы БЕН РАН как основа информа- ционного сопровождения научных исследований Каленов Н.Е. Функции библиотеки в наукометрической оценке публикационной активности вуза Дудникова О.В., Смирнова О.А. Библиотеки в программе 5-100, или За 3 года до… Михайлова Ю.В., Плохих М.В., Расплетина Е.Г. Организация единой точки доступа к ресурсам библиотеки: поиск вариантов реализации Литвинова Н.Н. Методика оценки зарубежных журналов в рамках выбранной тематики для публикации российских статей Глушановский А.В. МОСКВА, 2018 Наука и научная информация Том 1, № 1, 2018 Scholarly Research and Information V. 1, No. 1, 2018 Наука и научная информация научный рецензируемый журнал Цели и задачи Цель журнала «Наука и научная информация» — содействие развитию науки и образования за счет интеграции авторитетных электронных научных ресурсов в исследовательский и образовательный процесс. Одной из основных задач журнала является обобщение научных и практических достижений в части развития электронных информа- ционных ресурсов и сервисов, их вклад в процесс научных исследований и решение вопросов государственной политики, направленной на повышение уровня образования и науки, качества научных публикаций и развития си- стемы научных периодических изданий и расширения их присутствия в международном научно-информационном пространстве. Научная концепция издания предполагает публикацию материалов в следующих областях знания: «Науковеде- ние», «Народное образование. Педагогика», «Библиотечное дело. Библиотековедение» (по классификатору ГРНТИ). К публикации в журнале приглашаются как отечественные, так и зарубежные ученые и специалисты в вышепере- численных областях знания.
  • The Cuban Human Brain Mapping Project Population Based Normative EEG, MRI, and Cognition Dataset

    The Cuban Human Brain Mapping Project Population Based Normative EEG, MRI, and Cognition Dataset

    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2020.07.08.194290; this version posted July 10, 2020. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. The Cuban Human Brain Mapping Project population based normative EEG, MRI, and Cognition dataset. Authors: Pedro A. Valdes-Sosa1,2*+, Lidice Galan2*, Jorge Bosch-Bayard3,2,1*, Maria L. Bringas Vega1,2*, Eduardo AuBert Vazquez2*, Samir Das3, Trinidad Virues AlBa2, Cecile MadJar3, Zia Mohades3, Leigh C. MacIntyre3, Christine Rogers3, Shawn Brown3, Lourdes Valdes Urrutia2, Iris Rodriguez Gil2, Alan C. Evans3+, Mitchell J. Valdes Sosa1,2+ *Co-first authors +Co-corresponding authors Affiliations: 1The Clinical Hospital of Chengdu Brain Sciences, University of Electronic Sciences and Technology of China, Chengdu China 2CuBan Center for Neuroscience, La Habana, CuBa 3McGill Centre for Integrative Neurosciences MCIN. Ludmer Centre for Mental Health. Montreal Neurological Institute, McGill University, Montreal, Canada Abstract The CuBan Human Brain Mapping ProJect (CHBMP) repository is an open multimodal neuroimaging and cognitive dataset from 282 healthy participants (31.9 ± 9.3 years, age range 18–68 years). This dataset was acquired from 2004 to 2008 as a suBset of a larger stratified random sample of 2,019 participants from La Lisa municipality in La Habana, CuBa. The exclusion included presence of disease or Brain dysfunctions. The information made available for all participants comprises: high-density (64-120 channels) resting state electroencephalograms (EEG), magnetic resonance images (MRI), psychological tests (MMSE, Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale -WAIS III, computerized reaction time tests using a go no- go paradigm), as well as general information (age, gender, education, ethnicity, handedness and weight).
  • Ultra-High-Field Imaging Reveals Increased Whole Brain Connectivity

    Ultra-High-Field Imaging Reveals Increased Whole Brain Connectivity

    RESEARCH ARTICLE Ultra-high-field imaging reveals increased whole brain connectivity underpins cognitive strategies that attenuate pain Enrico Schulz1,2*, Anne Stankewitz2, Anderson M Winkler1,3, Stephanie Irving2, Viktor Witkovsky´ 4, Irene Tracey1 1Wellcome Centre for Integrative Neuroimaging, FMRIB, Nuffield Department of Clinical Neurosciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, United Kingdom; 2Department of Neurology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universita¨ t Mu¨ nchen, Munich, Germany; 3Emotion and Development Branch, National Institute of Mental Health, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, United States; 4Department of Theoretical Methods, Institute of Measurement Science, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia Abstract We investigated how the attenuation of pain with cognitive interventions affects brain connectivity using neuroimaging and a whole brain novel analysis approach. While receiving tonic cold pain, 20 healthy participants performed three different pain attenuation strategies during simultaneous collection of functional imaging data at seven tesla. Participants were asked to rate their pain after each trial. We related the trial-by-trial variability of the attenuation performance to the trial-by-trial functional connectivity strength change of brain data. Across all conditions, we found that a higher performance of pain attenuation was predominantly associated with higher functional connectivity. Of note, we observed an association between low pain and high connectivity for regions that belong to brain regions long associated with pain processing, the insular and cingulate cortices. For one of the cognitive strategies (safe place), the performance of pain attenuation was explained by diffusion tensor imaging metrics of increased white matter integrity. *For correspondence: [email protected] Competing interests: The Introduction authors declare that no An increased perception of pain is generally associated with increased cortical activity; this has been competing interests exist.
  • Open Access to Scientific Publishing

    Open Access to Scientific Publishing

    Editorial http://dx.doi.org/10.7577/formakademisk.1880 Janne Beate Reitan Open access to scientific publishing Interest in open access (OA) to scientific publications is steadily increasing, both in Norway and internationally. From the outset, FORMakademisk has been published as a digital journal, and it was one of the first to offer OA in Norway. We have since the beginning used Open Journal Systems (OJS) as publishing software. OJS is part of the Public Knowledge Project (PKP), which was created by Canadian John Willinsky and colleagues at the Faculty of Education at the University of British Columbia in 1998. The first version of OJS came as an open source software in 2001. The programme is free for everyone to use and is part of a larger collective movement wherein knowledge is shared. When FORMakademisk started in 2008, we received much help from the journal Acta Didactic (n.d.) at the University of Oslo, which had started the year before us. They had also translated the programme to Norwegian. From the start, we were able to publish in both Norwegian and English. Other journals have used FORMakademisk as a model and source of inspiration when starting or when converting from subscription-based print journals to electronic OA, including the Journal of Norwegian Media Researchers [Norsk medietidsskrift]. It is in this way that the movement around PKP works and continues to grow to provide free access to research. As the articles are OA, they are also easily accessible to non-scientists. We also emphasise that the language should be readily available, although it should maintain a high scientific quality.
  • Interactive Open Access Publishing & Collaborative Peer Review for Improved Scientific Communication and Quality Assurance

    Interactive Open Access Publishing & Collaborative Peer Review for Improved Scientific Communication and Quality Assurance

    Interactive Open Access Publishing & Collaborative Peer Review for Improved Scientific Communication & Quality Assurance Ulrich Pöschl Max-Planck-Institut für Chemie, Mainz www.mpch-mainz.mpg.de/~poeschl European Geosciences Union www.egu.eu EGU Outline Introduction ¾ challenges & perspectives Interactive Open Access Publishing & Collaborative Peer Review ¾ concepts & effects Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics (ACP) & European Geosciences Union (EGU) ¾ aims & achievements Conclusions ¾ summary & outlook EGU Motivation of Open Access Scientific, educational & economic advantages of free online availability of scientific research publications Educational: ¾ inform & stimulate students & general public ¾ equal opportunities in the information society (global & social) Economic: ¾ liberate distorted scientific information market (subscription/usage, cost/benefit, library budget crisis) ¾ enhance efficiency & facilitate innovation (formatting, distribution, evaluation, archiving, etc.) Scientific: ¾ enhance research impact & productivity ¾ improve quality assurance: bigger need, larger gain and higher importance than “mere increase of impact & productivity” EGU Open Access & Quality Assurance Open Access not a threat to scientific quality assurance but an urgently needed opportunity for improvement Traditional Peer Review: fully compatible with OA ¾ successful OA journals with traditional peer review, e.g.: PLoS Biology, BMC Structural Biology, New J. Physics, etc. Information for Reviewers: strongly enhanced by OA ¾ unlimited & interdisciplinary
  • Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

    Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea?

    1 Are Funder Open Access Platforms a Good Idea? 1 2 3 2 Tony Ross-Hellauer , Birgit Schmidt , and Bianca Kramer 1 3 Know-Center, Austria, (corres. author: [email protected]) 2 4 Goettingen State and University Library, Germany 3 5 Utrecht University Library, Netherlands 6 May 23, 2018 1 PeerJ Preprints | https://doi.org/10.7287/peerj.preprints.26954v1 | CC BY 4.0 Open Access | rec: 23 May 2018, publ: 23 May 2018 7 Abstract 8 As open access to publications continues to gather momentum we should continu- 9 ously question whether it is moving in the right direction. A novel intervention in this 10 space is the creation of open access publishing platforms commissioned by funding or- 11 ganisations. Examples include those of the Wellcome Trust and the Gates Foundation, 12 as well as recently announced initiatives from public funders like the European Commis- 13 sion and the Irish Health Research Board. As the number of such platforms increases, it 14 becomes urgently necessary to assess in which ways, for better or worse, this emergent 15 phenomenon complements or disrupts the scholarly communications landscape. This 16 article examines ethical, organisational and economic strengths and weaknesses of such 17 platforms, as well as usage and uptake to date, to scope the opportunities and threats 18 presented by funder open access platforms in the ongoing transition to open access. The 19 article is broadly supportive of the aims and current implementations of such platforms, 20 finding them a novel intervention which stand to help increase OA uptake, control costs 21 of OA, lower administrative burden on researchers, and demonstrate funders’ commit- 22 ment to fostering open practices.
  • Neuroimage: Clinical

    Neuroimage: Clinical

    NEUROIMAGE: CLINICAL AUTHOR INFORMATION PACK TABLE OF CONTENTS XXX . • Description p.1 • Audience p.1 • Impact Factor p.1 • Abstracting and Indexing p.2 • Editorial Board p.2 • Guide for Authors p.4 ISSN: 2213-1582 DESCRIPTION . NeuroImage: Clinical,, a companion title to the highly-respected NeuroImage, is a journal of diseases, disorders and syndromes involving the Nervous System, provides a vehicle for communicating important advances in the study of abnormal structure-function relationships of the human nervous system based on imaging. The focus of NeuroImage: Clinical is on defining changes to the brain associated with primary neurologic and psychiatric diseases and disorders of the nervous system as well as behavioral syndromes and developmental conditions. The main criterion for judging papers is the extent of scientific advancement in the understanding of the pathophysiologic mechanisms of diseases and disorders, in identification of functional models that link clinical signs and symptoms with brain function and in the creation of image based tools applicable to a broad range of clinical needs including diagnosis, monitoring and tracking of illness, predicting therapeutic response and development of new treatments. Papers dealing with structure and function in animal models will also be considered if they reveal mechanisms that can be readily translated to human conditions. The journal welcomes original research articles as well as papers on innovative methods, models, databases, theory or conceptual positions provided that they involve imaging approaches and demonstrate significant new opportunities for understanding clinical problems. AUDIENCE . Academic and clinical Neurologists and Psychiatrists working with brain imaging techniques, Imaging Neuroscientists, Cognitive Neuroscientists, Experimental Psychologists, Computational Neuroscientists, System Neuroscientists, Social Neuroscientists, Biostatisticians.
  • Standardizing Human Brain Parcellations

    Standardizing Human Brain Parcellations

    bioRxiv preprint doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/845065; this version posted November 26, 2019. The copyright holder for this preprint (which was not certified by peer review) is the author/funder, who has granted bioRxiv a license to display the preprint in perpetuity. It is made available under aCC-BY 4.0 International license. Standardizing Human Brain Parcellations Patrick E. Myers1, Ganesh C. Arvapalli1, Sandhya C.Ramachandran1, Derek A. Pisner2, Paige F. Frank1, Allison D. Lemmer1, Eric W. Bridgeford1, Aki Nikolaidis3, Joshua T. Vogelstein1, ∗ Abstract. Using brain atlases to localize regions of interest is a required for making neuroscientifically valid statistical infer- ences. These atlases, represented in volumetric or surface coordinate spaces, can describe brain topology from a variety of perspectives. Although many human brain atlases have circulated the field over the past fifty years, limited effort has been devoted to their standardization and specification. The purpose of standardization and specifica- tion is to ensure consistency and transparency with respect to orientation, resolution, labeling scheme, file storage format, and coordinate space designation. Consequently, researchers are often confronted with limited knowledge about a given atlas’s organization, which make analytic comparisons more difficult. To fill this gap, we consolidate an extensive selection of popular human brain atlases into a single, curated open-source library, where they are stored following a standardized protocol with accompanying metadata. We propose that this protocol serves as the basis for storing future atlases. To demonstrate the utility of storing and standardizing these atlases following a common protocol, we conduct an experiment using data from the Healthy Brain Network whereby we quantify the statistical dependence of each atlas label on several key phenotypic variables.
  • STM Feedback on Norway National Guidelines for Open Access The

    STM Feedback on Norway National Guidelines for Open Access The

    STM feedback on Norway National Guidelines for Open access The International Association of Scientific, Technical and Medial Publishers (STM) welcomes the National Guidelines for Open Access in Norway, published on 14th June. We also very much appreciate the speed with which these were translated into English to enable us to study them fully. We want to reinforce our support for the process that is underway and to share our global experience of working to successfully implement funder and government open access policies. With this in mind, we offer the following comments on the national guidelines, which we would be very happy to elaborate on and discuss in further detail. Gold Open Access We welcome the recommendation to establish a ‘gold first’ approach in Norway, similar to that adopted by the UK and the Netherlands, as the best way of supporting a transition from the current subscription model to a publishing economy based on open access. The only way in which a transition from the current subscription model can be achieved is through an alternative business model, for example gold OA. Our members are strong supporters of gold open access publishing and offer both gold and subscription publishing options to authors. One thing that is essential however to ensure a successful transition is for there to be funding available for gold. Again, we welcome the guidelines’ specific reference to the fact that financing arrangements to cover the costs of open access publishing must be put in place and that publically funded institutions should contribute to the funding of open access publishing and that private and charitably funded organisations should do the same.